China Military Watch - Jan 11, 2011

alexis · Post by **alexis** » 22 Aug 2012 18:02

In case of a nuclear war in ME, prices of oil will shoot through the roof; Indian/Chinese economy will not be able to survive such an impact without a lot of scratches as both depend on ME oil than more than US (as a % of oil basket).

Don · Post by **Don** » 22 Aug 2012 20:06

http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 8&cid=1101

PLA test-fired multiple warhead ICBM in July: Jane's Defence Weekly

Staff Reporter 2012-08-22 16:34 (GMT+8)

An anonymous US official says a Chinese DF-41 ICBM with the range to strike any city in the United States was test-fired by the PLA's Second Artillery Corps for the first time on Jul. 24, according to Jane's Defence Weekly.

With many American observers believing the missile can carry multiple independently targetable warheads, the DF-41 is considered a serious threat to US national security. An analyst told Jane's Defence Weekly that the ICBM can carry around 10 nuclear warheads to strike at multiple targets in the continental United States.

An article by Bill Gertz published in the Washington Free Beacon on Aug. 15 said the test of the DF-41 was conducted by the Second Artillery Corps of the People's Liberation Army at Wuzhai missile and space test center in the eastern province of Shandong nearly a month ago. "The new missile bolsters China's strategic forces," Gertz said, "making them among the most diverse in the world, with a variety of short-, medium-, intermediate- and intercontinental-range missiles."

The United States is currently unable to intercept missiles which employ a MIRV system. "The DF-41's multiple warheads are expected to include special simulated warheads called 'penetration aids' that are designed to counter US missile defense sensors," said Larry Wortzel, a member of the congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

"The Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which is in charge of both strategic and non-nuclear missiles, is working to integrate the DF-41 into its operational inventory," said Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute. "The system appears to incorporate a new, larger solid rocket motor than that used on the DF-31 series of delivery vehicles. Ground tests on the motor have been underway for a couple of years."

Phillip Karber from Georgetown University said that China will be able to target every US city with a population over 50,000 people by just putting 32 DF-41 MIRV missiles into service.

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 22 Aug 2012 20:12

The United States is currently unable to intercept missiles which employ a MIRV system.

If true, China, India, Russia, French & Israeli missiles that are MIRV capable can't be stopped. But I doubt that considering all the noise made by Putin about the new Topol M that can penetrate any missile shields. MIRV is old tech for Russia & USA and both should have developed countermeasures for them.

Any ideas, gurus?

adityadange · Post by **adityadange** » 22 Aug 2012 20:42

Don wrote:http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 8&cid=1101

PLA test-fired multiple warhead ICBM in July: Jane's Defence Weekly

Staff Reporter 2012-08-22 16:34 (GMT+8)

An anonymous US official says a Chinese DF-41 ICBM with the range to strike any city in the United States was test-fired by the PLA's Second Artillery Corps for the first time on Jul. 24, according to Jane's Defence Weekly.

With many American observers believing the missile can carry multiple independently targetable warheads, the DF-41 is considered a serious threat to US national security. An analyst told Jane's Defence Weekly that the ICBM can carry around 10 nuclear warheads to strike at multiple targets in the continental United States.

An article by Bill Gertz published in the Washington Free Beacon on Aug. 15 said the test of the DF-41 was conducted by the Second Artillery Corps of the People's Liberation Army at Wuzhai missile and space test center in the eastern province of Shandong nearly a month ago. "The new missile bolsters China's strategic forces," Gertz said, "making them among the most diverse in the world, with a variety of short-, medium-, intermediate- and intercontinental-range missiles."

The United States is currently unable to intercept missiles which employ a MIRV system. "The DF-41's multiple warheads are expected to include special simulated warheads called 'penetration aids' that are designed to counter US missile defense sensors," said Larry Wortzel, a member of the congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

"The Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which is in charge of both strategic and non-nuclear missiles, is working to integrate the DF-41 into its operational inventory," said Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute. "The system appears to incorporate a new, larger solid rocket motor than that used on the DF-31 series of delivery vehicles. Ground tests on the motor have been underway for a couple of years."

Phillip Karber from Georgetown University said that China will be able to target every US city with a population over 50,000 people by just putting 32 DF-41 MIRV missiles into service.

how can a civilian roam around such a valuable missile? and where are guards/crew? having morning tea at roadside dhaba?

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 22 Aug 2012 20:51

how can a civilian roam around such a valuable missile? and where are guards/crew? having morning tea at roadside dhaba?

As a chinese BRFite said, it gives them the Chinese goosebumps when they see China with such advanced technology to rival the sole superpower. Apparently, the Chinese govt allows the civilians to roam and use cameras around new platforms. You should see the 5th gen fighter hanging lopsised from a truck passing through crowded towns.

Don · Post by **Don** » 22 Aug 2012 21:02

nakul wrote:
how can a civilian roam around such a valuable missile? and where are guards/crew? having morning tea at roadside dhaba?
As a chinese BRFite said, it gives them the Chinese goosebumps when they see China with such advanced technology to rival the sole superpower. Apparently, the Chinese govt allows the civilians to roam and use cameras around new platforms. You should see the 5th gen fighter hanging lopsised from a truck passing through crowded towns.

The picture is only the transporter for the missile going through testing not an actual whole working system. The website said the picture is from 2007. Anyways, I am interested in the Jane's article if anyone has access to it.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 22 Aug 2012 22:50

Considering the Chinese are not limited by any Strategic Management Treaty of START type , the MIRV'ng of DF-41 should be worrisome to US and ROW as it would allow the chinese to exponentially increase their warhead numbers without any sort transparency displayed in this process.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 23 Aug 2012 07:48

China’s Space Odyssey

China’s space and counter-space capabilities mirror the rise of Chinese military and technological power. It is a well-accepted fact that triumphs in future wars shall critically hinge upon information superiority, which is being interpreted as a primary component of victory by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). There is a growing sense of assertion within and outside the PLA ranks, including among Chinese analysts, that the control of space is essential for control of the terrestrial domains. Domination in the space dominion enhances battlefield awareness and superiority and improves precision strike capabilities.

China’s space programme represents a major investment, aimed at enabling Beijing to utilise space in expanding its national power. China has acknowledged that its space industry has developed rapidly and is an important part of Beijing’s overall development strategy. While terming the next five years as crucial for “deepening reform and opening-up” and “accelerating the transformation of the country’s pattern of economic development”, China admits that space activities play an increasingly important role in its economic and social development.

The advancements in space technologies have become critical to the successful conduct of military operations as they empower Beijing to use its armed forces more effectively. Leading Chinese analysts have averred that in essence, China will follow the same principles for space militarisation and space weapons as it did with its nuclear weapons. This primarily means that Beijing is likely to develop anti-satellite and space weapons capable of effectively taking on an enemy’s space system, in order to constitute a reliable and credible defence strategy. For that matter, the Chinese vision of space warfare involves not just denying space to its adversary but also using space for affirmative ends such as the intercept of ballistic and cruise missiles through space-based combat platforms, strikes by space systems on terrestrial targets and attacks by land, air, sea, aerospace and space vehicles on an adversary’s space platforms and space-based command and control assets.

China’s military space capabilities cannot be understood outside the context of its current military strategy, which today is summarised by the phrase “active defence”. PLA’s Senior Colonel, Yao Yunzhu, predicts that “outer space is going to be weaponised in our lifetime”. The PLA comprehends that holding hegemony in space will enhance an ability that will impact upon ground mobility and air, sea and space combat.

Not just a flight of fancy

Although Beijing has been pursuing a diverse and comprehensive portfolio of space warfare investments ever since the late 1980s, perhaps the most complex and challenging engineering project ever undertaken by China came in the form of Project 921, launched on September 21, 1992, when the Politburo of the Chinese Communist Party held a meeting headed by Party Secretary Jiang Zemin, and arrived at a consensus that the human space flight programme would be vital for China to make its presence felt technologically, politically and militarily. Thus began Beijing’s ambitious space odyssey, marking the birth of its human space flight programme. Project 921 is scheduled for implementation in three distinct phases beginning with the first phase (1992-2005), to attain human spaceflight; the second phase (beginning 2007) aimed to develop advanced techniques for spaceflight including manoeuvring and docking; and, finally, the third phase envisions the construction of a multi-modular permanently-manned space station by 2020-2025, which would approximately weigh over 70 tonnes, and comprise of a 20-tonne core module and two experimental modules.

Since 1992, China has spent approximately 39 billion yuan ($6.1 billion) on Project 921 and has accomplished stage two of the project. In June 2012, China launched its fourth and biggest manned space mission, Shenzhou 9 (Divine Ship 9) spacecraft at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Centre in Jiuquan, on the edge of the Gobi desert in northern China. The Chinese spacecraft docked manually with an orbiting Tiangong 1 (Space Palace 1) module. The docking was carried out by remote control from a ground base in China and the manoeuvre was regarded as “precise and perfect”. Manual docking represents a major breakthrough in China’s space rendezvous, with Beijing appearing resolute to eventually command expertise in areas such as navigation and deep space missions. According to China’s official Xinhua news agency, arrangements for the Shenzhou 10 mission will be decided upon and announced following a complete review of the Shenzhou 9 mission and status of the orbiting Tiangong 1 module.

China’s space plans can be regarded as far-reaching. This was reflected when the Information Office of the State Council in Beijing released the third White Paper on China’s Space Activities in 2011, which outlines a plan for major tasks to be completed by 2016. These include “strengthening basic capacities of the space industry; accelerate research on leading-edge technology; and, continuing implementation of important space scientific and technological projects, including human spaceflight, lunar exploration, high-resolution earth observation system, satellite navigation and positioning system and new-generation launch vehicles”.

China is also likely to push for co-ordinated and sustainable development of its space industry, including creation of a comprehensive plan for construction of space infrastructure and promotion of its satellites and satellite applications industry, besides conducting space science research. More importantly, it will enhance the reliability and adaptability of launch vehicles in service, as well as development of new-generation heavy launch vehicles and their upper stages. In this reference, implementation of the first flight of the Long March 5, Long March 6 and Long March 7 next-generation launch vehicles holds critical significance.

China’s dream of placing a bigger space station in orbit pivots around the successful development of the Long March 5 booster rocket. The Long March 5 will use non-toxic and pollution-free propellant, intended to lift heavy payloads into space. It will be more than double the sizes of low earth orbit (LEO) and geosynchronous earth orbit (GEO) payloads that China can place into orbit. To support these new rockets, the construction of a new launch facility near Wenchang on Hainan Island began in 2008. Moreover, since 2006, the Long March rockets have accomplished 67 successful launches, sending 79 spacecraft into planned orbits.

Notwithstanding the strides embarked upon by Beijing in bringing its space mission to fruition, there is considerable opacity regarding the military applications of China’s space programme and counter-space activities. It is a foregone conclusion that there is an impending struggle between nations to gain supremacy in space exploration and military capabilities in space. The fact which further tends to complicate matters is the dual-use nature of space technology, which can be used for both civilian and military purposes. This, consequently, makes for a complex scenario wherein it is difficult to discern whether military space assets are intended for offensive or defensive purposes. China needs to be far more explicit and unequivocal in terms of the goals that it has set for itself in this regard. It, for instance, appears reticent when it comes to providing information regarding building of a permanent space station and also does not lucidly spell out its thinking on issues pertaining to space deterrence.

Code of Conduct

In order to address challenges related to outer space, a multilateral diplomatic initiative was launched by the European Union (EU) in June 2012 to negotiate for an “International Code of Conduct (CoC) for Outer Space Activities”. Expected to be adopted by 2013, the CoC’s purpose would be to ensure security and safety of all outer space activities. Ushering in transparency measures through a series of voluntary admissions, the CoC’s most significant objective is to limit the creation of space debris. The long-term sustainability and responsible usage of our space environment stand at risk from creation of huge masses of space debris.

By all means, space debris is recognised by all countries as a serious threat to space-based assets. That said, what makes the debate surrounding space-based issues more complicated is that they tend to be interpreted alongside a nation’s strategic interests and in this reference, any proposed space code of conduct should be approached with a will to strengthen stability in space by means of promoting liable operations in space. What perhaps could emerge as the biggest challenge herein would be a relative reluctance on part of nations to enter a code of conduct that would, in any way, hinder or constrain their respective national security-related activities in space.

China conducted an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapon test nearly five years ago in January 2007, with a medium-range ballistic missile lifting off from a launch site at the Xichang space facility in Sichuan Province and subsequently ramming into an ageing Chinese weather satellite, Fengyun 1C (FY-1C), deployed in LEO at an altitude of about 864 km. This test exponentially increased the amount of space debris in orbit, enough to last for a few decades in low orbit, thus proving hazardous to other operating satellites. Earlier in January this year, the International Space Station fired its thrusters to steer clear of an estimated 3,312 pieces of orbital debris created from China’s ASAT test in 2007, pronouncing the event as the largest debris-generating event on record. With more than 500,000 pieces of space junk being tracked daily, an update released by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) stated that the manoeuvre mentioned above “was designed to place the station at the correct altitude and trajectory for future visiting vehicle activities and to avoid a repetitive coincidence of possible conjunctions with a piece of Chinese Fengyun 1C satellite debris”. The Fengyun 1C satellite debris held the potential to cause seven conjunctions with the space station, and therefore steering the $100 billion safely into the clear was required.

China has stated officially that it will set up a design and assess system of space debris mitigation, and take measures to reduce space debris left by post-task spacecraft and launch vehicles in the next five years. In addition, China will experiment with digital simulation of space debris collisions, and build a system to protect spacecraft from space debris. How much of these assurances get translated into something tangible at hand remains to be seen.

China’s investment in the realm of both space and counter-space efforts is likely to adversely affect Asian strategic equations and the military capabilities of the major players in the region in a far-reaching manner. The script for China’s space odyssey is constantly evolving and it would only be prudent to innately engage Beijing in a space dialogue, protect the long-term sustainability of outer space activities and prevent potential conflict escalation in the space environs.

The writer is a Visiting Scholar at the Cooperative Monitoring Center, Sandia National Laboratories, USA

kit · Post by **kit** » 23 Aug 2012 09:10

All said and done china s space and missile capability will probably rival and in some areas even surpass the US ., the US seems to accept it and seeks to consolidate its lead in advanced sensors and the russians seem to concentrate on propulsion technologies

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 23 Aug 2012 09:45

MY only worry was Japan thought itself like that in the 1920's and 30's, Japanese needed the Petroleam reserves of Dutch east Indies which made fight the Europeans and the Americans and much of Asia. Will China go down that path??

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 23 Aug 2012 11:30

Aditya_V wrote:MY only worry was Japan thought itself like that in the 1920's and 30's, Japanese needed the Petroleam reserves of Dutch east Indies which made fight the Europeans and the Americans and much of Asia. Will China go down that path??

All the nationalists will think the same way.
Chinese nationalists will also make the same mistake with arrogance and will suffer.
It will be start of the 3 rd world war

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 23 Aug 2012 15:08

Well this actually is in reponse to Chna's BM buildup and threat.TO have developed a BM with 10MIRVs capable of striking anywhere in the US is exceptionally provocative.It must also urgently be countered by India,best with our own ICBMs thta can strike anywhere in China.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... -Asia.html

US plans new missile defence shield in Asia
The United States is planning to build a new missile defence shield in Asia to contain threats from North Korea and counter China's growing missile capabilities.

Malcolm Moore in Beijing
9:37AM BST 23 Aug 2012
A defensive array could include a new radar system in southern Japan and possibly another in South East Asia, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The news came after an unnamed US official told Jane's Defence Weekly that China's People's Liberation Army tested an intercontinental ballistic missile on July 24 which has the range to strike any city in the United States.

The DF-41 missile can carry ten separate nuclear warheads, each of which can be programmed to strike at a different target, the magazine reported.

The Pentagon is also concerned about China's development of a new "carrier-killer" anti-ship missile that can strike at the US Pacific fleet.

These missiles, which have a range of 930 miles, are designed to prevent US ships from approaching the South China Sea, a key sphere of Chinese influence.

Related Articles
Chinese anger at US base in Australia
16 May 2012

US Defence officials told the Wall Street Journal that the core of the new anti-missile shield would be a powerful early-warning radar, known as an X-Band, sited on a southern Japanese island. Discussions between Japan and the United States are currently underway.

The new X-Band would join an existing radar that was installed in northern Japan in 2006 and a third X-Band could be placed in South East Asia.

The resulting radar arc would cover North Korea, China and possibly even Taiwan. China currently has over 1,000 missiles pointed at Taiwan, and is likely to strenuously object to any interference from the US.

A spokesman for the Japanese Defence ministry declined to comment. A spokesman for the Pentagon told the newspaper that North Korea is the "immediate threat" that is "driving our missile defence decision making".

kit · Post by **kit** » 23 Aug 2012 16:01

Don wrote:http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subc ... 8&cid=1101

PLA test-fired multiple warhead ICBM in July: Jane's Defence Weekly

Staff Reporter 2012-08-22 16:34 (GMT+8)

An anonymous US official says a Chinese DF-41 ICBM with the range to strike any city in the United States was test-fired by the PLA's Second Artillery Corps for the first time on Jul. 24, according to Jane's Defence Weekly.

With many American observers believing the missile can carry multiple independently targetable warheads, the DF-41 is considered a serious threat to US national security. An analyst told Jane's Defence Weekly that the ICBM can carry around 10 nuclear warheads to strike at multiple targets in the continental United States.

An article by Bill Gertz published in the Washington Free Beacon on Aug. 15 said the test of the DF-41 was conducted by the Second Artillery Corps of the People's Liberation Army at Wuzhai missile and space test center in the eastern province of Shandong nearly a month ago. "The new missile bolsters China's strategic forces," Gertz said, "making them among the most diverse in the world, with a variety of short-, medium-, intermediate- and intercontinental-range missiles."

The United States is currently unable to intercept missiles which employ a MIRV system. "The DF-41's multiple warheads are expected to include special simulated warheads called 'penetration aids' that are designed to counter US missile defense sensors," said Larry Wortzel, a member of the congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission.

"The Chinese military's Second Artillery Corps, which is in charge of both strategic and non-nuclear missiles, is working to integrate the DF-41 into its operational inventory," said Mark Stokes, executive director of the Project 2049 Institute. "The system appears to incorporate a new, larger solid rocket motor than that used on the DF-31 series of delivery vehicles. Ground tests on the motor have been underway for a couple of years."

Phillip Karber from Georgetown University said that China will be able to target every US city with a population over 50,000 people by just putting 32 DF-41 MIRV missiles into service.

They will need DF 41 only in the tens vs India ! Nice ..20 -30 for india and another 30-40 for US ..

nakul · Post by **nakul** » 23 Aug 2012 16:16

The Df 41 with a range of 12000 km is useless for attacking India. They don't need anything more than 5500 km to hit India from anywhere in China, unless the missile plans to take a detour from South China Sea.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 23 Aug 2012 18:04

nakul wrote:The Df 41 with a range of 12000 km is useless for attacking India. They don't need anything more than 5500 km to hit India from anywhere in China, unless the missile plans to take a detour from South China Sea.

True and so is 90% of the reporting on China military from western sources. I will urge members to track more regional perspectives on china military. Rahul M ji was to come out with a paper on PLAAF, did I miss it?

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Aug 2012 18:06

China has set up a new missile brigade in its southern province of Guangdong as part of a "shock and awe" strategy to deter other countries with claims to the South China Sea from challenging its dominance in the region.

Citing sources familiar with the matter, the United Daily News said the new 827 Ballistic Missile Brigade is based in Guangdong's Shaoguan City.

While the brigade's administrative building was still under construction at the end of March, missile launch vehicles had been posted at the Shaoguan base.

Missiles installed at the base might include Dongfeng (DF)-21D anti-ship ballistic missiles and Dongfeng-16 -- a new type of ballistic missile that has a longer range than anything in China's current cross-Taiwan Strait arsenal.

Don · Post by **Don** » 24 Aug 2012 19:12

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012 ... oned-with/

August 24, 2012

China’s Ballistic Missiles: A Force to be Reckoned With.

By Andrew Erickson and Gabe Collins

China dislikes U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) developments, existing and potential. Ballistic missiles have long represented one of China’s greatest military strengths, and it does not want them, or the nuclear weapons that they can deliver, negated. Resigned to the fact that the U.S. cannot be forced to halt development of its missile defense systems or reduce its focus on the Asia-Pacific, Beijing appears to be offering selective reminders that its missile forces are growing too strong to contain.

On Thursday, The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. plans to enhance its missile defense systems in the Asia-Pacific. Notably, a day prior to that report, images appeared on Chinese government web portal purporting to show a possible new ICBM, termed the DF-41. The website cited a U.S. article claiming that China tested the DF-41 on July 24.

This may be part of a growing pattern in which Chinese entities engage in selective transparency concerning emerging weapons systems to rally citizens at home and deter potential opponents abroad.

Another recent example includes claims in a popular newspaper that a conventional ballistic missile with a range of 2500 miles, sufficient to strike Guam, will be “ready for service” by 2015, and that the carrier-targeting DF-21D anti-ship ballistic missile (ASBM) is already deployed. While the first missile’s status cannot be verified, Taiwan’s annual defense report confirms that “a small quantity of” DF-21D ASBMs “were produced and deployed in 2010.” Meanwhile, an article posted on the website of China’s Ministry of National Defense states that the “PLA should foster offensive defense thinking in developing long-range strike weapons.”

These explicit examples and implicit claims of Chinese missile prowess hardly represent paper tigers or empty talk. Building on a foundation of focused missile development since the late 1950s, Beijing is backing these data points up with substantive action. According to the latest U.S. National Air and Space Intelligence Center report on foreign ballistic and cruise missile capabilities (pdf), China is “developing and testing offensive missiles, forming additional missile units, qualitatively upgrading certain missile systems, and developing methods to counter ballistic missile defenses.” The U.S. Department of Defense’s 2010 unclassified report on China’s military states that “China has the most active land-based ballistic and cruise missile program in the world.” While this year’s report (pdf) was disappointing in its lack of detail, Chinese activities of late have only reinforced the Defense Department’s assessment.

Most distinctive in independent deployment potential and significant in overall capability are China’s nuclear and conventional ballistic missiles, which are controlled by the Second Artillery Force. With armament of the Chinese navy’s three deployed Type 094 ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) awaiting final testing of the JL-2 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM), land-based ballistic missiles are currently the sole delivery system for China’s nuclear weapons. As such, Beijing is determined to ensure their ability to penetrate the defense systems of potential opponents.

The goal is to ensure a secure second-strike capability that could survive in the worst of worst-case conflict scenarios, whereby an opponent would not be able to eliminate China’s nuclear capability by launching a first strike and would therefore face potential retaliation. As the U.S. Defense Department’s Ballistic Missile Defense Review points out, “China is one of the countries most vocal about U.S. ballistic missile defenses and their strategic implications, and its leaders have expressed concern that such defenses might negate China’s strategic deterrent.” In Beijing’s view, maintaining second strike capability can deter other powerful militaries from pressuring or attacking China in the first place.

In addition to homeland defense, specific roles envisioned for China’s ballistic missiles include preventing Taiwan from pursuing independence, maximizing Chinese leverage in territorial and maritime disputes, and discouraging the U.S. from intervening in regional crises or conflicts stemming from these or other issues.

Modest investment in ballistic missile defense offers the U.S. valuable technology development, general deterrence and some level of protection against dangerous regimes possessing limited ballistic missile capabilities, such as those of North Korea and Iran.

But while useful for other purposes, missile defense encourages, rather than dissuades, Chinese improvement of strategic nuclear forces.

Beijing can build so many missiles, at such an affordable cost, as to exceed the interception capability of any conceivable missile defense system. Attempting to overcome this reality would risk entering the U.S. into a race that it could not afford to wage, let alone win. China’s military overall still has weaknesses such areas as training and real-time coordination of sensors, but the SAF enjoys particular strengths in these respects as well and should not be underestimated.

Ballistic missile defense cannot be used to deny China secure second-strike—a capability that Beijing is determined, and able, to achieve (pdf). In fact, U.S. senior leaders frequently emphasize to Chinese leaders that U.S. missile defense systems do not have the technical capacity to do anything but stop a few missiles (and not even of the variety that China deploys), and are not aimed at preventing China from achieving secure second strike.

“Today, only Russia and China have the capability to conduct a large-scale ballistic missile attack on the territory of the United States, but this is very unlikely and not the focus of U.S. BMD,” the Ballistic Missile Defense Review explains. “Both Russia and China have repeatedly expressed concerns that U.S. missile defenses adversely affect their own strategic capabilities and interests. The United States will continue to engage them on this issue to help them better understand the stabilizing benefits of missile defense.”

China and Russia remain worried about whether or not they can believe or rely upon these assurances. Reasons include not only strategic distrust of the U.S. generally, but also possible advances in technology and—from their perspective, at least—the uncertainty surrounding whether a future U.S. administration of a different political persuasion might adopt a very different approach. Moreover, political actors in both China and Russia derive benefits from ignoring these assurances and exploit these issues for political gain.

Even with ongoing concerns and enduring differences in national interests, it behooves Washington and Beijing to attempt over time to enhance discussion of the sensitive and important subject of strategic deterrence. To be sure, dialogue is a two-way endeavor and will only be as productive as the sum of the efforts that both sides invest in it. Yet, as disappointing as results have been so far, the alternative to continued efforts at substantive discussion—the risk of misperception through disengagement—is far worse

kit · Post by **kit** » 24 Aug 2012 21:25

Seems like the american media is on the overdrive regarding China's MIRV capability.I do not think it was a overnight development. Some company really wants pentagon not to cut down research/ profit funds ! wonder which ?

vivek_ahuja · Post by **vivek_ahuja** » 24 Aug 2012 21:35

kit wrote:Seems like the american media is on the overdrive regarding China's MIRV capability.I do not think it was a overnight development. Some company really wants pentagon not to cut down research/ profit funds ! wonder which ?

While I am sure the US Think Tanks often cater to vested interests via hyperbole, I wonder at what point we (as in Indians) start using it as a lever to bend reality so that it fits inside our bubble view of the threats around us.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Aug 2012 06:14

http://www.itbusinessnet.com/article/Ch ... es-2166171

Video clip on the PLAN's massive expansion and threat to Asia-Pacific nations.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Aug 2012 06:35

Kit and Don to test a 5000km missile India had to launch it towards Antartica. Does PRC have the landmass to launch a 12000 km range vehicle?

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Aug 2012 07:05

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... epage=true
India ill-prepared to deal with China, warns Shyam Saran

In recent months, Mr. Saran said, China once again appeared to be changing course on India, in the face of a backlash against its posture in the South China Sea, the United States’ decision to enhance its military assets in the Pacific, and persistent domestic unrest in Xinjiang and Tibet.

New Delhi had been “unable to engage in active and imaginative diplomacy to leverage this opportunity to India’s enduring advantage.”

K. Sundarji, India’s Army Chief, meanwhile used India’s new strategic airlift capabilities to move troops to occupy parallel positions — setting up posts just 10 metres from the new Chinese positions.

India’s own political leadership, Mr. Saran said, was taken by surprise by the mercurial General Sundarji’s actions — and the Chinese infuriated. However, he argued, the operation paid off. “While we may not have planned it this way, the Chinese judged our actions through their own prism: that we had countered their unexpected move by a well orchestrated counter move of our own.”

“The lesson to be drawn,” Mr. Saran concluded, “is not that we should be militarily provocative but that we should have enough capabilities deployed to convince the other side that aggressive moves would invite counter-moves.”

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 30 Aug 2012 09:55

I guess Indian Policy makers need to take cue from Kiyani - "We go by the capability of the adversary and not his intentions".

Don · Post by **Don** » 30 Aug 2012 15:20

self deleted

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Aug 2012 15:54

Clone of Russian missile-torpedo VA-111 "Shkval" developed by the Chinese , check link for pictures

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/318004.html

From the presentation, it follows that the Chinese have created using principle supercavitation prototype weapons that exceeded rate of speed "flurry" of 200 knots. They have achieved an efficiency of drag reduction environment in 86.7%, and thus created a technological base to create samples of underwater weapons at over 200 knots. The presentation says it is about technology demonstrator, not the finished weapons system. At the same time, the development of a mature - on one of the slides mentioned that the authors of the 2006 Award winning KONTOP (Committee for Defence Science, Technology and Industry for China).

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Aug 2012 16:00

Chinese aircraft carrier may be introduced into the fleet by late 2012, but will not reach combat readiness until 2017

MOSCOW, August 30. (ARMS-TASS). Chinese aircraft carrier may be introduced into the fleet in late 2012, but did not reach combat readiness in 2017. This is reported by Chinese media.

The newspaper "Shanghai Daily", in particular, the researcher quoted Chinese Naval Academy Senior Colonel Li Jie (Li Jie) that

"Usually takes three years to ensure that the aircraft carrier was commissioned after the first sea trials and 5-8 years to become fully operational."

According to him, the carrier can not carry out military operations alone without covering other naval forces, the composition of carrier strike group (AUG) includes frigates, destroyers and cruisers. To ensure tasks ASW AUG also required submarines.

Each U.S. Navy aircraft carrier is usually accompanied by two guided missile cruisers, two frigates, two nuclear submarines and craft supplies.

Chinese aircraft carrier has already spent nine offshore sea trials and is now the 10th time will be released in the sea for their continuation.

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 30 Aug 2012 19:23

rohitvats wrote:I guess Indian Policy makers need to take cue from Kiyani - "We go by the capability of the adversary and not his intentions".

IMHO, It is not well formed argument for one reason that intentions can happen without capabilities..and any country (example pakis) can go any extent to obtain any type of capability to cause terror. So, intention can supersede capability. OTOH, for conventional nations who are respectful of international rights, etc.. capability can supersede intentions. That is how normally progress of a country is measured. And the reason, many advancing nations become advanced by demonstrating their capabilities, even though they don't intent to strike terror or cause harm.

Of course, some countries having the capability, must require the third factor. ie., well defined policy and threshold doctrine.. for example, USA. They are capable, and have very little threshold to bring their intentions on the table, with their policy drivers. They have caused destruction at global levels - from gulf wars to what not.

If India needs to advance, it has to be measured on its capabilities, have an unilateral policy drivers based on strong economic fundamentals, and ever intend to strike at countries who are ever willing to demonstrate their bad intentions [like chippanda]. Our forces, government and country-men are currently misdirected (for both short and long term - cataract vision) is all I can say.

However, corruption can bring down all capabilities, intentions, and policies to trashcan.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 04 Sep 2012 00:19

China set to order 55 Mi-171Es from Ulan Ude in Russia

China to obtain 55 Mi-171E transport helicopters

jamwal · Post by **jamwal** » 05 Sep 2012 19:34

ChinaDaily.com.cn carries article lambasting western nations which have criticized Chinese weapon exports fueled regional conflicts and humanitarian crises in Africa. Washington Post had published an article on August 26 where it said that China’s dubious arms exports policies and anti-UN stance in this matter makes it stand apart from other arms exporters like US, Russia etc.
In his article, author Kong Chushan claims:

“China’s arms trade strictly follows three important principles:

1) exports should be conducive to the legitimate self-defense capabilities of the recipient country;

2) exports should not undermine the peace, security and stability of the region concerned and the world as a whole, and

3) exports should not be used to interfere with the internal affairs of the recipient country.”

Although the article is not too far from truth in criticising hypocrisy of western nations, but when one considers Chinese track record of illegal trade of nukes and missiles with rogue terrorist nations like Pakistan and North Korea, this article seems nothing more than another one of their famous face saving measures.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 05 Sep 2012 22:32

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf ... 120904.asp

Chinese Aegis Destroyer Evolves

September 4, 2012: Recent photos (official and otherwise) from a Chinese shipyard appear to show at least two large destroyers, apparently of the Type 052 class under construction. One was recently launched and is being called the Type 52D. It appears very similar to the American Aegis equipped destroyers (especially the Burke Class).

Over the last decade two Type 052B and two Type 052C destroyers have entered service. Now at least two of what appear to be Type 052D class ships are under construction. These appear to be 7,000 ton ships armed with 64 American style (hot launch) VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes for anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles. There is a single 130mm gun, six torpedo tubes (for submarines) and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter. This is all tentative, since the first Type 62D is still being fitted out (equipped with weapons and other gear).

The older (2004) Type 052B Guangzhou Class Destroyers are 5,900 ton general purpose ships (with anti-ship/submarine/aircraft capabilities). Armament consists of 48 HQ-16 anti-aircraft missiles (range 30 kilometers) and 16 C-802 anti-ship missiles (range 120 kilometers). There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter.

Type 052C Lanzhou Class Destroyer are 6,500 ton ships that first appeared in 2005. These ships use cold launch VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes. There are 48 HQ-9 anti-aircraft missiles. There are also eight C-602 anti-ship missiles, in two four-cell launchers. There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter. These ships are mainly for air defense and use a phased array radar similar to the American Aegis system.

With these three versions of the Type 052 destroyer China has, in about a decade, advanced their destroyer designs considerably and now have ships similar in capabilities to the 8,300 ton American Arleigh Burke class destroyers that entered service two decades ago.

nits · Post by **nits** » 05 Sep 2012 23:01

Chinese defence minister gifts Rs one lakh to IAF pilots

It was an unusual gift from Chinese defence minister Gen Liang Guang Lieto two Indian Air Force pilots – Rs one lakh in cash.

The pilots were given cash in two envelopes after they flew the visiting minister by specialIAF aircraft from Mumbai to Delhi on Monday, sources told PTI here today.
They said after seeing off Liang, the pilots checked their ‘unusual gift’ in sealed envelopes and then realised it was Rs one lakh cash in Indian currency.

The Captain of the aircraft then informed the Air Headquarters about the ‘gift’ and it was decided that the money would be deposited in the Government depository (toshakhana), the sources said.

Don · Post by **Don** » 06 Sep 2012 05:06

Philip wrote:http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf ... 120904.asp
Chinese Aegis Destroyer Evolves

September 4, 2012: Recent photos (official and otherwise) from a Chinese shipyard appear to show at least two large destroyers, apparently of the Type 052 class under construction. One was recently launched and is being called the Type 52D. It appears very similar to the American Aegis equipped destroyers (especially the Burke Class).

Over the last decade two Type 052B and two Type 052C destroyers have entered service. Now at least two of what appear to be Type 052D class ships are under construction. These appear to be 7,000 ton ships armed with 64 American style (hot launch) VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes for anti-aircraft and anti-ship missiles. There is a single 130mm gun, six torpedo tubes (for submarines) and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter. This is all tentative, since the first Type 62D is still being fitted out (equipped with weapons and other gear).

The older (2004) Type 052B Guangzhou Class Destroyers are 5,900 ton general purpose ships (with anti-ship/submarine/aircraft capabilities). Armament consists of 48 HQ-16 anti-aircraft missiles (range 30 kilometers) and 16 C-802 anti-ship missiles (range 120 kilometers). There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter.

Type 052C Lanzhou Class Destroyer are 6,500 ton ships that first appeared in 2005. These ships use cold launch VLS (Vertical Launch System) tubes. There are 48 HQ-9 anti-aircraft missiles. There are also eight C-602 anti-ship missiles, in two four-cell launchers. There is a single 100mm gun and two 30mm autocannon for anti-missile defense. There is also one helicopter. These ships are mainly for air defense and use a phased array radar similar to the American Aegis system.

With these three versions of the Type 052 destroyer China has, in about a decade, advanced their destroyer designs considerably and now have ships similar in capabilities to the 8,300 ton American Arleigh Burke class destroyers that entered service two decades ago.

Type 52D

abhik · Post by **abhik** » 06 Sep 2012 11:11

nits wrote:Chinese defence minister gifts Rs one lakh to IAF pilots

It was an unusual gift from Chinese defence minister Gen Liang Guang Lieto two Indian Air Force pilots – Rs one lakh in cash.

The pilots were given cash in two envelopes after they flew the visiting minister by specialIAF aircraft from Mumbai to Delhi on Monday, sources told PTI here today.
They said after seeing off Liang, the pilots checked their ‘unusual gift’ in sealed envelopes and then realised it was Rs one lakh cash in Indian currency.

The Captain of the aircraft then informed the Air Headquarters about the ‘gift’ and it was decided that the money would be deposited in the Government depository (toshakhana), the sources said.

Wonder who else got these Rs 1 lakh lifafas from the Chinese defence minister

.

Don · Post by **Don** » 07 Sep 2012 18:32

The remaining 52C are now fitting out there will be 6 in total. Construction will now swicth to 52D...Note the difference in phase array radars between C and D.

kit · Post by **kit** » 08 Sep 2012 09:51

The Chinese shvkal is the direct product of espionage , the Russians never sold them any . Iran has a few. Some naval personnel in Russia were arrested by GBU not long back

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 08 Sep 2012 10:26

I read Chinese got couple of Shkaval through Kilo deal

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 08 Sep 2012 12:39

I think we are looking at China in a very disjoint and piecemeal manner. All this development on the weapon platform(s) front will mature in a certain time period. Remember, Chinese always think long term...I'll concede them this. A ship here, a combat aircraft there, purchase of jet-engines, Mi-17 type of helicopters etc are all dots in a larger picture. We need to do some serious in-depth analysis - something on the line of following points:
1. structure and capability of PLAN and PLAAF over next 5-10-15 years
2. pockets of strength which will allow them to dominate certain areas in 5 years - for example, South China Sea.
3. The PLAAF and PLAN matrix which will allow them to achieve point 2 above.
4. Component of aircraft and warship-building which china has mastered domestically and others which are still imported. This will show where the bottlenecks are.

I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is and partner with BRFites for the study. I'll even put up a separate China-Watch type blog if required. But I must admit that I'm a bit technically challenged, so will need guidance. I've deliberately kept the PLA out of this for two reasons - (a) the transformation within armies involves many more sub-components (b) it is much more time consuming than doing a study on PLAAF or PLAN.

Please let me know if we can do this in a time bound manner.

eklavya · Post by **eklavya** » 09 Sep 2012 23:17

abhik wrote:
nits wrote:Chinese defence minister gifts Rs one lakh to IAF pilots

Wonder who else got these Rs 1 lakh lifafas from the Chinese defence minister .

Looks like the lifafas for the IAF band got intercepted and shot down before they could reach target.

Chinese defence minister wished to give cash gift to military band

Makes one wonder about the culture of the PLA.

Sushants · Post by **Sushants** » 10 Sep 2012 02:03

we will ****** chinese .. at an approprite time

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 10 Sep 2012 02:10

Sushants wrote:we will ****** chinese .. at an approprite time